Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/gnu/dist/gcc/gcc/config/i386
To:, Krister Walfridsson <>
From: Christos Zoulas <>
List: tech-toolchain
Date: 07/19/2004 17:05:27
On Jul 19,  9:56pm, (Matthias Drochner) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/gnu/dist/gcc/gcc/config/i386

| Actually, whenever I tried to debug something in-depth I came
| to a point where gdb was useless. Didn't cope with threads, didn't
| show useful stackframes, couldn't singlestep or whatever. I always
| ended up with printf()s or other code instrumentation...
| (That's not to argue about debug symbol formats, just a side note.
| It might explain however why almost noone cares about debugging
| issues.)
| As I said in another mail, when I changed gcc-3.3's default in -current,
| I primaliry wanted to establish something which can be pulled up to
| the 2.0 branch or not, depending on further development. At that point
| I was still optimistic that the dwarf2 output got fixed in the gcc-3.3
| branch.
| Now Christos had this change pulled up to the branch. For some
| reason supposedly...

To solve the same issue.

| > I think that gcc must be changed back to use dwarf.
| Agreed, it should be changed back. This is where gcc develops,
| stabs is more or less historical.
| I'll do so if noone beats me in this. (and noone will notice:-(
| For the 2.0 branch, I'd like to hear Christos' opinion, and
| other toolchain gurus.
| In the medium term, we should face a switch to gcc-3.4 which is
| much better in this respect. This needs to be done platform-by-
| platform probably, so we need some infrastructure in gnu/dist
| and *.mk...

Yes, this is a stop-gap measure and should be reverted once dwarf
debugging works.